I've used that argument, but all I was pointing out was that even if you accept his definitions his actions are inconsistent with his justifications. As in, ok, suppose we are trying to reduce WMD, why aren't we in North Korea then, or hey, if our motives are humanitarian, what's wrong with Sudan?
And the difference appears to be oil. Dana On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 13:31:35 -0700, Ken Ketsdever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No, I am saying that "how long should we wait" is a ridiculous argument. Especially > being there we more eminent threats at the time. > > When Bush mentioned the axis of evil the left thought > he was nuts. Now he's nuts because he hasn't attacked > them yet. > > He can't win either way in your book. > > Confidentiality Notice: This message including any > attachments is for the sole use of the intended > recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged > information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or > distribution is prohibited. If you are not the > intended recipient, please contact the sender and > delete any copies of this message. > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Protect your mail server with built in anti-virus protection. It's not only good for you, it's good for everybody. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=39 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:132144 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
